There's an increasing inclination for shifting from mysql to NOSQL, SQLite, etc. I've read many blogs and articles evaluating the rate of mysql with other kinds of DBMS. However, In my opinion that speed isn't a trouble with mysql, because it is really fast the main problem is much more associated with resource usage. It's quite common to manage extreme server load because of mysql slow queries. For example, a benefit of Oracle over mysql would be to tight on problem connected with memory leaks.

  1. Could it be correct that mysql consumes considerably more assets (CPU and memory) evaluating along with other databases for example SQLite, Non-relational databases, key/value databases. By considerably I am talking about could it be the primary reason behind not using mysql for big databases (in order to save server costs).

  2. If So (to at least one), what is definitely an estimate of better resource use of an identical system like SQLite evaluating with Mysql.

Note: Think about a simple system as advanced options that come with mysql isn't needed. Just evaluating the performance for straightforward queries.

If you are only using "simple" queries, I do not think there's a difference regarding ressource usage between MySQL and e.g. Oracle. Individuals "professional" DBMS perform a large amount of "miracle" regarding caching, prefetching and data maintanance. Obviously MySQL does that a lot, but may possibly not be as efficient for really complex databases and advanced queries.

Your choise of DBMS highly is dependent on which you are likely to do, particularly if you are selecting between SQL/NoSQL/Key-Value/..., that are for completely different scenarios… that's less an issue of memory and CPU usage.

CPU and Memory never would be the reason, because they are cheap. The issue is using the I/O speed. NoSQL databases are utilized in write-intensive programs, too as with programs which require schema-less database (because altering the table schema in MySQL involves spinning the table, which might be very slow). So some trade-offs are created to optimize the disk procedures, which frequently result in consuming more CPU, memory or disk space.

One more reason might be pessimistic versus positive locks. That is another subject.

Consider the response to the question "Could it be correct that mysql consumes considerably more assets (CPU and memory) evaluating along with other databases" is NO, it's pointless to go over it further :)